[Dovecot] Version numbering

[Frank Cusack]

On March 29, 2007 10:13:37 AM -0500 Eric Rostetter 
<rostetter at mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
> Quoting Charles Marcus <CMarcus at Media-Brokers.com>:
>
>> This is *server* software. If someone is not capable or willing to do
>> the research to know what the difference between the packages available
>> are, *regardless* of what numbering scheme Timo settles on, then they
>> have no business running a server and/or deserve what they get if they
>> do so anyway...
>
> Yep, and the people who don't look both ways before crossing the street
> deserve to be run over, so don't bother breaking for them.  Just smash
> them, they deserve it!

Yup.  Well to stick to software, why shouldn't every single piece of
software in the world have its own unique versioning scheme?  I mean, it's
just a way for the author to make his mark.  If someone is not capable or
willing to research every single piece of software they run, they have
no business running it.  Long live Windows!

> Let's face it, the world is full of stupid and ignorant people, and in
> the spirit of ultruism we should try to help them.  And what is more
> ultruistic than open source software?

You mean normal people, who are simply not versed in our art (and shouldn't
have to be, as you say).  That doesn't make them stupid and ignorant.  If
you had to know how TV worked to watch it ... well anyway we'd have better
programs I'm sure!

I'm sure you were just making a rhetorical point, but I disagree that
anything should be done in the spirit of ultruism [sic].  It should be
done in the interest of making the best possible software, and part of
'best' means easy to use by some average sysadmin.  That has to include
the packaging.

Wow, this is turning into the thread of threads.  I guess it just shows
how popular dovecot really is.  Since none of us has any say in the
matter.  What have you wrought Timo??  WHAT HAVE YOU WROUGHT? :-)

-frank